On 26 May 2025, the Italian Government notified the European Commission through the TRIS system (Technical Regulation Information System), a regulatory proposal aimed at significantly increasing administrative penalties for the use of “milk sounding” designations by producers and sellers of plant-based foods.
The notified amendment would involve the insertion of a new Chapter II-bis into Legislative Decree 231/2017 – Penalty rules for violations of the provisions of Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011 – through the insertion of a new Article 7bis, specifically dedicated to violations of European rules on designations reserved for dairy products.
The new text aims to tighten penalties but also to adopt an absolutely restrictive interpretation of Regulation (EU) No. 1169/2011.
The new article establishes that:
«Anyone who prepares, produces, packages, holds, sells, advertises or otherwise places on the market food products using designations that usurp, imitate or evoke those of milk or dairy derivatives in violation of Annex VII of Regulation (EU) No. 1308/2013, shall be subject to administrative penalties ranging from €4,000 to €32,000, or up to 3% of annual turnover in cases where the latter exceeds €32,000»
Furthermore, the seizure of goods and any material used in the violation is provided for, with the aim of confiscation and destruction. The maximum penalty may not in any case exceed €100,000.
The provision also applies to cases where the term “milk” or “cheese” is accompanied by explanatory indications (e.g. “almond milk”) or negative expressions (e.g. “non-dairy cheese” or “not cheese”).
Finally, the rule excludes the reduced payment option provided for by Law 689/1981, thus making the discounted payment of the penalty unavailable.
To appreciate the scope of this rule, it is worth considering that penalties of this magnitude are not even provided for the omission of allergens on labels, a potentially lethal violation for allergic individuals.
What European law says
A ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2017 had already addressed an issue concerning the dairy sector, and with its judgment found it unlawful to use the designation “milk” to refer to a purely plant-based product, since Regulation (EU) No. 1308/2013 reserves this possibility exclusively for dairy products; this is why on the Italian and European market today we find plant-based drinks, rather than “soy milk” or “oat milk” in the strict sense.
However, more recent European case law suggests an interpretative evolution.
In case C-438/23 of 26 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union annulled a French decree that prohibited the use of meat-related terms (such as “sausage” or “steak”) for plant-based products. We discussed this in this article.
The Court established that there is insufficient evidence that such designations mislead consumers, and also clarified that the FIC Regulation (food information to consumers) EU 1169/2011 already guarantees strict rules to protect informational transparency.
The Court found that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that such designations mislead consumers.
Although this more recent ruling did not directly concern dairy designations, the principle is relevant: a designation cannot be prohibited simply because it recalls a well-known product if the consumer is not confused, and if the purpose is purely descriptive or conventional (e.g. “plant-based grated cheese”).
The Italian Government has most likely failed to take into account the temporal and cultural gap between the 2017 ruling and the 2024 one. This is not merely a matter of time passing, but of a profound shift in consumer behaviour and awareness: today, people choose plant-based products for ethical, health and environmental reasons, certainly not out of confusion with traditional products.
Consumers know perfectly well what they are buying and do so with full awareness. The Government’s stance is, therefore, nothing more than an anachronistic resistance to change.
Furthermore, no consideration is given to the negative impact that tightening penalties could have on the very agri-food sector that the Government claims, at every turn and every opportunity, to want to protect. Many companies in the traditional agri-food sector have already converted part of their production towards plant-based – just think of Granarolo, Amadori, Nestlé – tapping into a strongly growing demand.
This initiative is part of a regressive and repressive trend that runs counter to the direction set by the European Green Deal, the goals of the 2030 Agenda, FAO and UN reports, modern nutritional guidelines and new consumer preferences.
Rather than protecting traditional productions with rigid and anachronistic tools, it would be more useful to support the evolution of the food system – which is already adapting to market developments – with inclusive, balanced measures grounded in data, science and freedom of choice.
